proxmox_guest_migrate

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

Without annotations, the description partially discloses behavior (requires elevated permissions, migrates to another node) but omits details like online migration, side effects, or async behavior. Schema parameters add some context but are not in the description.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Single sentence is efficient, front-loads the action and resource, and includes critical context (type requirement and permissions) without extra fluff.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

No output schema is provided, and the description does not explain what the tool returns (e.g., success status, async job ID). For a migration operation, this is a significant gap. Also, with 9 parameters, the description could be more complete.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 89%, so description adds minimal value beyond what's already in the schema. The main description does not elaborate on parameters except for 'type' being mentioned inline.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states the action ('Migrate'), the resource ('VM or LXC container'), and distinguishes it from sibling tools like cloning or starting by specifying the required 'type' parameter.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description mentions elevated permissions as a prerequisite but does not provide guidance on when to use this tool over alternatives (e.g., clone, move disk). No explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use info.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.